Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:47558 Court No. - 5 Case :- WRIT - B No. - 778 of 2025 Petitioner :- Krishna Sharan Dubey @ Aniruddha Dubey Respondent :- Consolidation Officer, Sadar, Ayodhya And Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Mohammad Ehtesham Khan Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J. 1. Heard Sri Mohammad Ehtesham Khan, learned counsel for petitioner as well as learned Standing Counsel for the State- respondent no. 1 and Sri Karam Veer Yadav, learned counsel for respondent No. 2. 2. In light of the proposed order, notices to private respondents are dispensed with. 3. It has been submitted by learned counsel for petitioner that present writ petition pertains to various plots of land situated in Village - Samda, Tehsil - Sadar, District Ayodhya which was recorded in the name of Thakur Awadh Bihari Ji Bhagwan Virajman Digambar Akhada, Samda, Ayodhya through its Sarvarahkar Mahant Paramhans Ram Chandra Das Chela Mahant Sukhram Das Ji @ Sukhdev Das. 4. It has further been submitted that after taking permission of the competent authority a registered sale deed was executed on 17.03.1989 in favour of Pradhan Peeth Umariya, Basit and subsequently in proceedings U/S 12 of U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act the Assistant Consolidation Officer by order dated 16.09.1989 passed an order directing the disputed land to be recorded in the name of Pradhan Peeth Umariya, Basti. It is stated that the order dated 16.09.1989 was challenged before the Settlement Officer Consolidation in an appeal U/S 11(1) which was decided on 19.05.2025 allowing the said appeal and the order dated 16.09.1989 was set aside. 5. In the said appeal, the petitioner was arrayed as respondent and being aggrieved by the order dated 19.05.2025 the petitioner has filed a revision before the Dy. Director of Consolidation which is pending before the Dy. Director of Consolidation / Additional District Magistrate, Ayodhya. It has been stated that the court of Dy. Director of Consolidation is vacant due to which the revision preferred by the petitioner is not being heard. While on the other hand the order dated 19.05.2025 is being complied with in proceedings under Rule 109(A) of Consolidation of Holding Rules. It has been informed by learned counsel for respondents that in absence of posting of the Dy. Director of Consolidation, the work has been assigned to Additional District Magistrate, Ayodhya. 6. Accordingly, learned counsel for petitioner submits that grievance of the petitioner shall be substantially redressed in case revisional authority considers and decides the application for interim relief with expedition. 7. Learned counsel for respondent No. 2 also does not object the prayer made by learned counsel for petitioner and made a statement that in case the decision on application of interim relief is expedited the petitioner undertakes not to alienate the disputed property till appropriate orders are passed on the application of interim relief. 8. In light of the above and with the consent of the parties, the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to Additional District Magistrate who is holding the charge of the Dy. Director of Consolidation to consider the application for interim relief filed by the petitioner with expedition and decide the same in accordance with law after giving full opportunity of hearing to the parties within next four weeks from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before him, if there is no legal impediment. 9. The parties before this Court undertake to file all the objections and pleadings in this regard within next two weeks and will also cooperate in the proceedings before the revisional authority. 10. Till the application for interim relief is decided, the disputed property shall not be alienated. (Alok Mathur, J.) Order Date :- 14.8.2025 Ravi/ Digitally signed by :- RAVI SHANKAR SRIVASTAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench